On Fri, Jun 05, 2026 at 08:07:02PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:

On 6/5/26 18:14, Nico Pache wrote:

quoted

The following series provides khugepaged with the capability to collapse
anonymous memory regions to mTHPs.

To achieve this we generalize the khugepaged functions to no longer depend
on PMD_ORDER. Then during the PMD scan, we use a bitmap to track individual
pages that are occupied (!none/zero). After the PMD scan is done, we use
the bitmap to find the optimal mTHP sizes for the PMD range. The
restriction on max_ptes_none is removed during the scan, to make sure we
account for the whole PMD range in the bitmap. When no mTHP size is
enabled, the legacy behavior of khugepaged is maintained.

We currently only support max_ptes_none values of 0 or HPAGE_PMD_NR - 1
(ie 511). If any other value is specified, the kernel will emit a warning
and mTHP collapse will default to max_ptes_none=0. If a mTHP collapse is
attempted, but contains swapped out, or shared pages, we don't perform
the collapse.
It is now also possible to collapse to mTHPs without requiring the PMD THP
size to be enabled. These limitations are to prevent collapse "creep"
behavior. This prevents constantly promoting mTHPs to the next available
size, which would occur because a collapse introduces more non-zero pages
that would satisfy the promotion condition on subsequent scans.

Patch 1-2:   Generalize hugepage_vma_revalidate and alloc_charge_folio
             for arbitrary orders.
Patch 3:     Rework max_ptes_* handling into helper functions
Patch 4:     Generalize __collapse_huge_page_* for mTHP support
Patch 5:     Require collapse_huge_page to enter/exit with the lock dropped
Patch 6:     Generalize collapse_huge_page for mTHP collapse
Patch 7:     Skip collapsing mTHP to smaller orders
Patch 8-9:   Add per-order mTHP statistics and tracepoints
Patch 10:    Introduce collapse_possible_orders helper functions
Patch 11-13: Introduce bitmap and mTHP collapse support, fully enabled
Patch 14:    Documentation

Went through it and didn't find any blockers. Let's wait for Lorenzo's assessment.

If he also doesn't find anything major, I think we can move forward with merging
it and handle smaller things as follow-ups.

All LGTM :)

Unless sashiko tells us about something utterly broken (trivial things meh,
existing things meh), or we see some massive breakage in testing, I
think... *drum roll*

We're good to take this this cycle :)

Thanks Nico for your patience during this process and obviously David and Lance
and all the other reviews for taking part.

We got there in the end :)

--
Cheers,

David

Cheers, Lorenzo